Mediaboss Marketing

Peter Oborne is right to call out Conservative bias in the BBCs election coverage (In this election, the BBC has let down those who believe in it, Journal, 3 December) and likely to be right too in his assessment that the reasons for the bias are institutional, beyond the prejudices of a few well-known reporters. Put simply, the BBC tends to be more sympathetic to the status quo and the government of the day than political change.

Yet behind all that lies the hard work of thousands of professional BBC employees out there reporting and producing news on a wide range of matters that the printed media no longer often does.

As with the gender pay gap at the BBC, perhaps its time for those at Broadcasting House to listen more to their employees and their trade unions and less to the politicians of the moment.Keith FlettLondon

Fran Unsworth, the BBCs director of news and current affairs, writes: Impartiality is precious to us. Well protect it (Journal, 4 December). To claim that the rightwing bias catalogued by Peter Oborne was a couple of editorial mistakes is frankly risible. Her argument that conspiracy theories are in vogue just will not wash. I note that her defence of the BBCs news coverage concentrates on the few weeks of this general election campaign, but I have observed rightwing bias in a number of current affairs programmes for many years. And we all remember Steve Bells brilliant IF strip highlighting rightwing bias on the Radio 4 Toady programme, which featured Nick Robinson.

Last Sunday the BBC did a U-turn and allowed Boris Johnson to appear on the Andrew Marr show, claiming it was in the public interest. Marr lost control of the interview and the only interest served was that of the Conservative party.

If Unsworth wants to salvage some of the BBCs tattered reputation she needs to ensure that the promised interview between Andrew Neil and Boris Johnson takes place before the general election; otherwise the accusation of Tory bias will be reinforced.Geoffrey Carpenter Worthing, West Sussex

Fran Unsworth seeks to justify serious flaws in reporting at the BBC with bluster at a highly critical time in our politics. She cites three instances of error all of which favoured the prime minister.

First, in the excellent Question Time leaders debate, there was mocking laughter at the response of Boris Johnson to a question about trustworthiness. This was later edited out of footage for a lunchtime news bulletin. A clumsy one-second edit, she says.

Second, coverage of the cenotaph remembrance service where the PM made a mistake laying a wreath and looked foolish was replaced by archive footage of him at the 2016 service on BBC Breakfast. We are fanciful to consider this significant, she says.

Third, the inability of the corporation to ensure that all the party leaders are interviewed by Andrew Neil before next weeks election in order to be impartial. Neil exposed flaws in all the party leaders reasoning with corresponding headlines in the press the next day. Why has the PM not been interviewed? Unsworth says the logistics are highly complex. Not good enough from our public service provider.Nancy HardyEastergate, West Sussex

I take issue with what Fran Unsworth wrote in claiming impartiality at the BBC. To my mind, she is making the mistake of equating quantity with quality.

If there are many hours of programming but without rigorous challenging of politicians and political statements then the BBC becomes part of the propaganda machine. It is falling behind Channel 4 in the quality of its interviewing. Part of the defence is that there is information produced by the BBC online.

On checking both the Policy Guide and Reality Check which Unsworth cites, I was less than impressed. The analysis of the Conservative top priorities lists 50,000 more nurses and 20,000 more police officers both discredited claims. This is not a simple editorial mistake. Need one say more about our diminishing trust in the BBC?Stephen HawkinsEdinburgh

Fran Unsworth seemingly derives satisfaction from the fact that the BBC is criticised by both left and right in almost equal volumes. But this is due to the fact that the BBC overrepresents the centre at the expense of both left and right.

This is conveyed, for example, by BBC political journalists frequent use of the word moderate, with its overtone of approval, to describe those in the centre of politics.

This was fine when the centre embodied a national consensus. But at a time of political polarisation, the BBC and other public service broadcasters need to widen their ideological lens if they are to fulfil Unsworths vision of seeking to represent the nation in its entirety.Prof James CurranGoldsmiths, University of London

In 1984, I was appointed head of the BBC Bristol Network Production Centre. It was the time of the miners strike. Every morning we received a shoal of letters complaining about the BBCs coverage. They fell into two broad categories: those who thought the BBC was a lackey of the rightwing establishment, and those who thought it was a subversive, lefty organisation. Every morning, we would sort the letters into two piles. And every morning, the piles were exactly the same height.

These were people who had been watching exactly the same programmes. I rest my case.John Prescott ThomasBristol

Join the debate email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

Read more Guardian letters click here to visit gu.com/letters

Do you have a photo youd like to share with Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and well publish the best submissions in the letters spread of our print edition

Go here to read the rest:
The BBC cannot dodge accusations of Tory bias - The Guardian